Scaling a Motor Skill Through Observation and Practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors examined the proposal that a motor skill is scaled through physical practice and not through observation of a model. In 4 groups, participants (N = 32) did or did not imitate a model bowling a ball to a target 8 m away. In an assessment phase, those groups did or did not observe the same model bowling a ball to a target 4 m away. Participants who viewed a model in the assessment phase were more accurate and consistent in terms of bowling accuracy than were those who did not. Their shoulder and wrist velocity profiles were more similar to those of the 4-m model than were those of the no-model group. Participants who had previous practice and viewed a demonstration were more accurate at scaling the wrist of the bowling arm. Observing a demonstration facilitates the acquisition of control-related features of a movement. Furthermore, early acquisition of coordination aids the use of velocity information for scaling the endpoint of the primary effector.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it